The memo, described by officials familiar with it, centered on the lack of an endgame strategy as well as the inability of the administration to clarify its intentions toward the Assad government.

Hagel warned the fighting in Syria could go on for years without any clear end, and that Syrian President Bashar Assad was deriving benefits from the US campaign.

The memo was much more critical than Hagel has been in comments publicly, and he declined to discuss the specifics of the memo, saying only that he felt he owes the president “honesty.”

The lack of an endgame strategy has been something analysts have been pointing out for quite some time, as the US talks up backing a moderate rebel force that they haven’t even begun attempting to create, and which is going to take at least a year to be in any sort of form. Hagel’s memo acknowledges this in a way that officials haven’t publicly, and suggests that even if they don’t want to admit it, the problem is very much on their minds.

The issue with Assad is even more complicated, as the administration publicly insists it still wants regime change, but is clearly coordinating, at least secretly, with the Syrian military.

Author: Jason Ditz

30 thoughts on “Hagel Blasts Syria Strategy in Memo”

What a mess! Assad like Husain was far better then who they are trying to replace him with. Of course both Husain and the Assad family were one time allies of the USA. It doesn't pay to be friends with the USA.

we should have been help[ing Assad from the onset of the war. By not doing that we dug our selves in a whole. The US can not wrap its head around the fact that they screwed up. The administration still calls ISIS ISIL as they do not want to admit their failure in Syria. We should be looking after our own interests, and not that of the Israeli's or the GCC.

If by "we" you mean the US, then no, "we" should not have been "helping Assad." We should have been minding our own business. Syria is neither a US state nor a US territory. What happens there should not be any of "our" concern.

Beside AIPAC, the both war parties, manipulative politicians, right wing democrats or republican and etc. reflecting their idea for regime change is Syria, there is no political, social or economic reason for USG/English and that Swedish King in cooperation with Saudi barbaric regime wanting for Syrian government, it's political system to be changed. USG/Europe/saudis and UAE are affried of the unity between Iran, Libya, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon that was taking shape until, 2010, the economic cooperation alone was enough reason for Obama getting involved in Libya and than Syria.

The western regimes always been affried of the unity in middle east; therefore they built Israel, therefore they support saudis barbarian regime, therefore they divided Iraq in 1920s and created Kuwaiti regime, therefore they divided Palestrine and let the Israeli immigrants, their terrorist organization to steal palestinians land. Now in 2014 the Saudi barbarians (ISIS)claim their caliphate from 1920s and they are helped by their creators, a Stone Age regime hand in hand with that european modernized Neo fascism, the Swedish King and others whom wants to take the world back into the dark ages and keep it there, because these elements whom call themselves "civilized" can't stand the unity of the people anywhere, their mental sickness is over and beyond being psychopath, they simply have lost their humanity to be told that they are sick.

{as the administration publicly insists it still wants regime change, but is clearly coordinating, at least secretly, with the Syrian military.}
Shame on you warmonger and war criminal. You are RESPONSIBLE for 250000 deaths so far, yet you don't want to f*ck off from Syria. Who gave YOU the right to determine the fate of a soverreign nation with more years of civililization thay you? Dr. Bashar Assad has far more credibility and legitimacy than zionist stooges that you take orders. He has been ELECTED his people under your bombs, contrary to your superior who has been SELECTED BY SOROS a zionist criminal. The world is fed up with you and wanta you to get lost from Syria and the region. It is Assad duty to kill your proxies in his country. Syria it NOT yours or Soros. How many more millions do you want to kill?

come on!! yes he is targeted because of his opposition to israel but none of this would not even have started if asad had listened to the people instead of gunning down unarmed street protesters. and about election yes he was elected just like saddam was elected and each and every dictator around the world is elected.

After that it plans on turning on him. Obama and our supine congress have said so.. How could any policy be more immoral? It would be like Patton's idea to fight the Soviets right after they were largely responsible (much more than the US) for knocking out Hitler.

Well, no. He became a war criminal when he voluntarily signed on to the Obama Administration's plan of regime change and an unchecked war of aggression against multiple foes in the ME. And that's not even counting the involvement in the coup perpetrated by US-aided and armed neo-Nazis in Ukraine.

With the kind of money it moves, and the power of those who want the game to continue, I probably wouldn't want to risk running out of enemy either. …and revealing an endgame would risk being held to it–or at least the perception of weaseling out of it.

Interesting that not-having-an-endgame, or not showing it, has been encouraged by warmongers in the case of the Taliban… they'd say e.g. a withdrawal timetable just encourages the enemy, etc. What a handy rhetorical device The Enemy is…

Time to put up or shut up Chuck. You know you are on a sinking ship and the last two years of the Obama admin will not be pretty. You could go out in a burst of glory by resigning and condemning Obama's war policies. But please don't be like Panetta, who wants to increase the bombing and fighting for another 30 years. Be the man you were as a senator when you spoke out against W's Iraq fiasco.

No, what McChrystal did was wrong. What his staff said (and he condoned) may in fact have been true, but he was wrong doing to air it publicly. But in this case, I was pointing out that what Hagel said was true…the Syrian gambit is fuggedup with no suggestion of it getting better.

He owes the President honesty, even if he doesn't bray about it in public. That is what was missing in Vietnam — all yes-men, nobody telling it like it was, starting with McNamara by his own admission.

I'm not privy to know how much Hagel is really doing that, but he's right, that is what he owes to the President and to all of us. It is doing the job.

But the public airing of the "dirty laundry" is where he goes beyond "doing the job" and steps into the "let's make the boss look bad" arena. And for that he should be fired – regardless of whether he's maneuvering himself for a possible Clinton II administration and needs to put distance between the old and "new" bosses. If nothing else, it's bush league and disrespectful. If he is at loggerheads with the boss, he should/could just resign—and then write a book.

He blasts the strategy 'cause it is clearly stupid, costly, violent, tragic, counterproductive, with only very questionable gains to be foreseen.
Sorry but I again see it as the US Golem doing the destructive and nihilistic bidding of the Jewish State – they would be happy if these countries fought pointlessly forever, as long as a lot of these poor people suffered, died, became refugees and orphans.

What's good for Jew State is often bad for everyone else nearby.
It won't happen but I kind of hope that one of these US bombers goes off on it's own and bombs part of JSIL, just to show them who still wears the pants around here. Very few people, after their latest Palestinian slaughter, would mind if a few of the jewish supremacists were torched.

"…clearly stupid, costly, violent, tragic, counterproductive, with only very questionable gains to be foreseen."

And the oft-suggested alternative to the current plan (or non-plan, IYL) by the warmongers is also "clearly stupid, costly, violent, tragic, counterproductive, with only very questionable gains to be foreseen. But like the current plan and the warmonger's plan, any "plan" that advocates any action in the region…like staying there or helping one side or another…or both, as the case may be, are massive fails just waiting to be documented.

The only plan that is to the benefit of the American people is the leave the mess we created, and let the denizens of the region clean it up. Our continued "leadership" in the region can only bring more death and destruction and a long lasting promise of earned retribution in our country someday down the road.

"reticence" about plans isn't the same as "inability" to plan, and most actually interested about what some call any "endgame" result(s), and most attempts to stampede popular opinions, themselves typically do not easily cause numerous largely indifferent sorts to default into any loss of much sleep because at least a few others seemingly are upset or anxious about "no plans" or consequent result(s), etc. indeed, red herrings really do not trick many, and could instead serve as red flags to warn some about foolish commitments or useless confusion, even if what they want is often what they already have, etc., no matter any protests, etc., or what very few actually would preclude for long, if ever. therefore, only to say that "reticence" cannot ever be practical is not much of a failure or unsolvable problem, etc.